> Why do you need it? Do you initiate suspend without userland asking > you to? Because there is an existing API, via /dev/apm_bios, and that's all X understands ! And because I've always done that ;) > Anyway, it should not be arch-dependend. We need one good mechanism of > notifying userland, not one per architecture. We need to define a new mecanism, I think. In the meantime, my APM emulation works though and I won't drop it. > > > > /* called after unfreezing userland */ > > > > void (*post_freeze)(suspend_state_t state); > > > > > > > > That one is the mirror of pre-freeze, gets called after userland has been re-enabled, > > > > it also calls my old-style notifiers, which includes APM emulation, which is important > > > > for sending the APM wakeup events to things like X. > > > > > > Could this be marked deprecated, too? > > > > > > Alternatively, proper way of notifying X (etc) should be created, and > > > done from generic code.... > > > > Sure, ideally. However, existing X knows how to deal with APM events, > > and thus APM emulation is an important thing to get something that > > works. Pne thing I should do is consolidate PPC APM emu with ARM one as > > I think Russell improve my stuff significantly. > > Perhaps we need apm emulation on i386, too? Maybe. It may help in some cases. Ben.
